DON'T BE FOOLED by movies and reality shows about "lost soul" or any deceased (good or bad) floating around as ghosts.

The dead know NOTHING and are dead, as if asleep - UNTIL they are awakened by GOD.........to go either to Eternal Life or to perish and be NO MORE (the wicked do not burn for all eternity), that's a teaching of man.

Ecc 9:5 For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.

Floating ghosts....come on man..!!!

I've experienced the paranormal and have captured evidence of it. Not to mention others have captured evidence of paranormal activity. Here is a bible study for you:

Psalms 137:9

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

Capp, yours is a CLASSIC ploy to use 1 verse in the Bible, but OMIT the previous verse:

Psa 137:8 O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy [shall he be], that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us.
Psa 137:9 Happy [shall he be], that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.

Babylon was the "evil" nation that took the Jews captive for 70 years. This was a song and PROPHECY of "payback" as the Jews would return back to rebuild their Holy City. Cyrus the Great did this exact thing of allowing their return back to Jerusalem.

DON'T BE FOOLED by movies and reality shows about "lost soul" or any deceased (good or bad) floating around as ghosts.

The dead know NOTHING and are dead, as if asleep - UNTIL they are awakened by GOD.........to go either to Eternal Life or to perish and be NO MORE (the wicked do not burn for all eternity), that's a teaching of man.

Ecc 9:5 For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.

Floating ghosts....come on man..!!!

I've experienced the paranormal and have captured evidence of it. Not to mention others have captured evidence of paranormal activity. Here is a bible study for you:

Psalms 137:9

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

Capp, yours is a CLASSIC ploy to use 1 verse in the Bible, but OMIT the previous verse:

Psa 137:8 O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy [shall he be], that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. Psa 137:9 Happy [shall he be], that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.

Babylon was the "evil" nation that took the Jews captive for 70 years. This was a song and PROPHECY of "payback" as the Jews would return back to rebuild their Holy City. Cyrus the Great did this exact thing of allowing their return back to Jerusalem.

So, it's okay to defeat evil with heinous acts against children if god deems it so? I don't care what the "evil" nation is accused of doing. Smashing little children against stones is immoral and disgusting. Why this "just and fair" god would allow such a thing means it is malevolent and unjust.

Again, why would a god of peace/love/harmony sanction such atrocities?

Isaiah 14:21-22
King James Version (KJV)
21 Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers

Ezekiel 18:19-20
King James Version (KJV)
19 Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live.

20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father

So who gets screwed for playing RGIII - Mike or Kyle? Or both? Or neither? Just asking.

Now Darth, it isn't fair to use the Bible's contradictions against itself. Gods ways are higher than ours and we won't even begin to understand his ways; therefore, we should just have faith that he knows what he is doing. And his contradictions are not even contradictions since we don't fully understand him and all of his wisdom.

Cappster wrote:Now Darth, it isn't fair to use the Bible's contradictions against itself. Gods ways are higher than ours and we won't even begin to understand his ways; therefore, we should just have faith that he knows what he is doing. And his contradictions are not even contradictions since we don't fully understand him and all of his wisdom.

If the Bible was written by God, then you might be on to something. But as it is, you're just feeding your own ego.

Cappster wrote:Now Darth, it isn't fair to use the Bible's contradictions against itself. Gods ways are higher than ours and we won't even begin to understand his ways; therefore, we should just have faith that he knows what he is doing. And his contradictions are not even contradictions since we don't fully understand him and all of his wisdom.

If the Bible was written by God, then you might be on to something. But as it is, you're just feeding your own ego.

I agree. The bible was made up and written by Jewish/Hebrew men. It is rather ironic that *god* would choose one group of people over all others as the "chosen ones" if he loves us all equally. Does god play favorites or does playing favorites sound like the mentality of man? Did god create us or did we create many gods? I think the answers are clear.

I thought when the chick ate the apple and her goofy counterpart joined in, we'd have all this knowledge.

However it seems like it only gets more confusing as I get older.

As I have gotten older, I've asked many more questions than I was ever allowed to ask as a child and now I know why. Religion has too many holes and not enough evidence to back up what is preached from the pulpit. I was having a conversation earlier with a science teacher who proclaimed that since we all originated in Africa, that our ancestors were black and those of us with lighter skin...our ancestors moved north and slowly lost pigmentation in our skin. Anyway, the point being is I always see pictures of a white Adam and Eve instead of the color they should've been (not to mention Adam was made from dirt which is brown). Not to mention I always see white Jesus instead of Jewish Jesus.

(2) Anyway, most of the Bible seems to have begun as oral traditions, as story/songs memorized by bards. The Greeks did not become literate until about the 7th century, BC...sometime in the 600's BC...and even then maybe 10% or 20% of free Greeks could read. That's why Homer's epics were sung. People (men) went to performances of epic poems, which is probably why Plato banned poets from his ideal state. The epics -- and Illiad and Odyssey are just two, but we know there were many others -- had a mesmerizing rythm. Audiences became spellbound...which Plato thought degraded a man's critical thinking.

It is likely that the "Old Testament" was sung: nobody could write it, but people cultivated an enormous memory.

(3) Scholars suggest that the Bible, as we know it, came from several sources. Thus, two different creation stories in Genesis. Sometimes God is called "YWH", and sometimes as, approximately, The Lord.

Sometime, probably during or just after the Babylonian captivity, priests assembled and edited the two or three traditional sources, making changes here and there so the pieces fit better.

(4) Our notion of logic comes to us from Plato and Aristotle. It assumes that contradictory things cannot both be true at the same time. Our western culture believes that all parts of a statement or an entire work should be consistent with all other parts. Ancient people had no such assumptions. They knew a story, so they kept it...better to keep a good story than to lose one.

(5) It is interesting to read the Bible commentaries of Philo of Alexandria, a Greek-speaking leader of the Jewish community, someone trained in neo-platonic philosophy. Philo's works can be found on the web, for instance at: http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/philo.html.

So it seems as though you are saying that the Bible is essentially a garbled up mess of writings made up by a bunch of illiterate people and that was edited by those who sought to use its "teachings" to control the masses? haha.

I always like to ponder, sometimes to myself and at times to others, about "What if Jesus, instead of coming to Earth 2,000 years ago, came today and started preaching that he was the son of God?" I mean, a long haired middle eastern hippie looking man proclaiming to be our savior? He wouldn't get the time of day in this country. And I like your #4 as those of us who do think critically realize that all pieces of the puzzle must fit properly and not contradict one another in order for such a "divine book" to be truly inspired by a deity that is all knowing.

Cappster wrote:I always like to ponder, sometimes to myself and at times to others, about "What if Jesus, instead of coming to Earth 2,000 years ago, came today and started preaching that he was the son of God?" I mean, a long haired middle eastern hippie looking man proclaiming to be our savior?

There you go associating Jesus' looks to those paintings you just finished decrying. If he came today, he would probably dress and groom himself in the manner befitting his ethnicity, region, and generation, just as he did 2000 years ago.

Cappster wrote:I always like to ponder, sometimes to myself and at times to others, about "What if Jesus, instead of coming to Earth 2,000 years ago, came today and started preaching that he was the son of God?" I mean, a long haired middle eastern hippie looking man proclaiming to be our savior?

There you go associating Jesus' looks to those paintings you just finished decrying. If he came today, he would probably dress and groom himself in the manner befitting his ethnicity, region, and generation, just as he did 2000 years ago.

I was referring to Jewish Jesus; not white Jesus that prejudice white people hang on their walls. I was simply stating that Jesus would have a hell of a time getting people to listen to his message today as he is most likely too brown to be considered a messiah. And I say that, because I am inferencing certain people I know who speak very prejudice against *colored* people then go on about how the love Jesus. Anyway, how do you feel about what Welch wrote?

Cappster wrote:I always like to ponder, sometimes to myself and at times to others, about "What if Jesus, instead of coming to Earth 2,000 years ago, came today and started preaching that he was the son of God?" I mean, a long haired middle eastern hippie looking man proclaiming to be our savior?

There you go associating Jesus' looks to those paintings you just finished decrying. If he came today, he would probably dress and groom himself in the manner befitting his ethnicity, region, and generation, just as he did 2000 years ago.

I was referring to Jewish Jesus; not white Jesus that prejudice white people hang on their walls. I was simply stating that Jesus would have a hell of a time getting people to listen to his message today as he is most likely too brown to be considered a messiah.

In his own time, he was part of an oppressed people, and very few considered him to be a messiah, even amongst his own people. Most thought that the messiah would come as a great warrior, to free his people from their oppression, not as a man of peace and humility. It wasn't until the emperor Constantine made Christianity the official religion of Rome, did he gain the status with which you associate him today.

Cappster wrote:how do you feel about what Welch wrote?

I have no issue with anything Welch writes. He is generally very tempered, thoughtful, and sincere in his posts, and brings a learned point of view to the table. Some others here, not so much.